PEER-REVIEWED ARTICLE bioresources ARTICLE bioresources.com Kminiak & Gaff (2015). “Wood...

PEER-REVIEWED ARTICLE bioresources.com

Kminiak & Gaff (2015). “Wood transversal sawing,” BioResources 10(2), 2873-2887. 2873

Roughness of Surface Created by Transversal Sawing of Spruce, Beech, and Oak Wood

Richard Kminiak and Milan Gaff *

The created surface irregularities, namely roughness profile Ra, after the sawing of spruce, beech, and oak wood on a sliding mitre saw with manual saw blade feeding were studied. The created surface roughness was monitored at a cut height, e, of 50 mm using three basic modes of solid wood transversal sawing (flatwise cross-cutting at φ2=90°, flatwise edge-mitre cross-cutting, and flatwise mitre cross-cutting at φ2=45°). The monitored surface was made using a sliding mitre saw with the gradual application of saw blades with 24, 40, or 60 teeth, and special saw blade with 24 teeth and a chip limiter (CL), respectively. The saw blades used had identical angle geometries. Three levels of feed force, Fp, of 15, 20, and 25 N corresponding to a range of feed forces used by different operators were used in the experiment. The roughness of sawn surfaces was significantly influenced by cutting model, wood species, type of saw blade, and feed force. The created surface roughness values were very close to the plane milling values.

Keywords: Transversal sawing; Feed force; Number of teeth; Surface roughness; Beech; Oak; Spruce

Contact information: Department of Wood Processing, Faculty of Forestry and Wood Sciences, Czech

University of Life Sciences in Prague, Kamýcká 1176, Praha 6 - Suchdol, 16521 Czech Republic; also

Department of Woodworkings, Technical University in Zvolen, T. G. Masaryka 24, Zvolen, 96053,

Slovakia

* Corresponding author: [email protected]

INTRODUCTION

During transverse cutting, preliminary transverse sawing with a length allowance

and final transverse sawing to the required dimension are distinguished. In transverse

cutting to the required dimension, the created surface quality, primarily the created

surface roughness, plays a significant role. In general, the roughness of the created

surface should be at the level of plane milling, because from the technological point of

view, after transverse cutting into the desired size followed by mostly just grinding

operation.

Each process operation causes infringement of the work piece’s initial properties

and integrity and leaves typical irregularities on the machined surface. These are

manifested by microscopic changes such as the machined surface roughness and

macroscopic changes such as waviness, scratches, corrugations, hollows, and thorn fibers

(Siklienka and Kminiak 2013). According to Malkoçoğlu (2007), the machining

properties of woods are directly related to machining defects (fuzzy grain, torn grain,

raised grain, etc.). The wood cutting parameters (energy consumption, dust level, and

noise level), the emerging product parameters (dimensional accuracy and created surface

quality), and the produced chip parameters (dimensions and particle size composition)

depend on the teeth shape, teeth dimensions and number, cutting tool geometry,



sharpness, and technological conditions of the process, such as feed speed, feed force,

and cutting speed (Örs et al. 1991; Efe et al. 2007; Kvietková et al. 2015).

According to Budakçi et al. (2011), the surface quality depends mainly on the

chip thickness as well as on the cutting speed and the rake angle, respectively. Because of

the anisotropic structure of the wood, high quality machining of the wood depend on the

use of proper machining procedures, the feed speed, the tool geometry, and the suitable

technical treatment of these cutters in relation to sharpening and maintenance (Yildiz

2002).

A fundamental role, when sawing, is played by the blade perpendicular to the

direction of the wood fibers. During transversal cutting, the lateral cutting edges of the

saw blade teeth cut the fibers and form the walls of the cut kerf (Fig. 1b). The main cut

edges during closed cutting form the gullet bottom. A typical feature of a surface created

by sawing with saw blades are half-moon-shaped traces (Fig. 1a).

When comparing different wood species, deciduous trees generally yield a higher

quality of surface than conifers. For example, Örs and Baykan (1999) found that surfaces

with lower roughness and higher smoothness can be acquired on Fagus orientalis rather

than on Pinus sylvestris wood. Sadoh and Nakato (1987) found that the surface

smoothness results for diffuse-porous woods were smoother than for the ring-porous

woods. Kilic et al. (2006) found that surface of sawn beech wood was rougher than that

of aspen wood, although both wood species are diffuse porous. Moreover, Malkoçoğlu

(2007) found that better surface quality can be obtained on summer wood than on spring

wood. Other important factors include the physical and mechanical properties of wood, as

these properties directly affect all woodworking processes (Barcík and Gašparík 2014;

Gaff 2014; Gaff and Matlák 2014; Fekiač et al. 2015).

a b

Fig. 1. Mechanism of cut surface creation by sawing: (a) half-moon shaped traces, and (b) forming of cut kerf. (Note: vc denotes cutting speed, vf feed speed, fz feed per tooth φvs feed angle of the cutting edge entry into the wood, φvys feed angle of the cutting edge exit from the wood, φi feed local angle corresponding to the monitored point M, bs cut gap width, and yv saw teeth setting)

The aim of this work was to determine the influence of number of teeth of circular

saw blades as well as feed force on surface roughness of beech, spruce, and oak wood

during transversally cutting at constant cutting speed (vc = 62 m/s).



EXPERIMENTAL

Materials Three wood species with industrial relevance in Slovakia were selected for the

experimental measurements: European spruce (Picea abies L.), European beech (Fagus

sylvatica L.), and English oak (Quercus robur L.). The trees used for the experiment,

which grew in the Zvolen location, were harvested in 2012 at an age of 45 years. Suitable

zones were cut from the trunk at a height of 2 m from the stump. Flat-sawn wood samples

had dimensions of 50 mm × 150 mm × 1000 mm.

Clear samples were conditioned in a conditioning room (relative humidity (ϕ) =

65 ± 3% and temperature (t) = 20 ± 2 ºC) for more than four months to achieve an

equilibrium moisture content (EMC) of 12%.

Methods Sliding mitre saw

The wood experimental cutting was carried out using a GCM 10S Professional

sliding mitre saw (Robert Bosch GmbH, Germany) (Fig. 2). Table 1 summarizes the

mitre saw parameters.

Fig. 2. Sliding mitre saw

Table 1. Mitre Saw Parameters

Parameters

Rated power input 1,800 W

Cutting capacity, 45° bevel 53 mm × 305 mm

Cutting capacity, 45° mitre 87 mm × 216 mm

Cutting capacity, 0° 87 mm × 305 mm

Mitre setting 52° L / 62° R

Bevel setting 47° L

No-load speed 4,700 rpm

Saw blade diameter 254 mm

Sound pressure level 94 dB(A)

Saw blade

Four saw blades with sintered carbide plates were selected for the experiment

(Fig. 3). The saw blades had identical diameters (D = 250 mm), identical tool thicknesses

(b = 3.2 mm), identical cutting edge geometries (clearance angle α = 15°, cutting angle of



edge β = 60°, rake angle γ = 15°, lateral edge relief angle ξ = 15°, and frontal edges radial

inclination angle λ = 7°), and alternating teeth (WZ). Three of these saw blades were

PREMIUM (EXTOL, Czech Republic) with various numbers of teeth: 24 teeth (Fig. 3b,

Fig. 4b), 40 teeth (Fig. 3c), and 60 teeth (Fig. 3d); there was also a SPEEDLINE-WOOD

(Robert Bosch GmbH, Germany) blade with 24 teeth and a chip limiter (Fig. 3a, Fig. 4a).

Fig. 3. Configuration of saw blades: (a) 24 teeth and a chip limiter; (b) 24 teeth; (c) 40 teeth; and (d) 60 teeth

Fig. 4. Detail of 24-teeth saw blades: (a) saw blade with chip limiter; and (b) without chip limiter

Transversal sawing

Most similar experiments are based on constant feed speed vf. For the present

experiment, the use of a feed force, Fp, is typical. Feed force was substituted for feed

speed because of manual feeding. This reflects the essence of the saw blade manual feed

into the cut. Because constant experimental conditions, such as a constant feed force,

cannot be met during real manual feeding, the feed force was simulated in an

experimental stand (Fig. 5).

The hand movement (Fig. 6) is simulated by the movement of a hauling rope (Fig.

7), and the proper feed force is extracted by weights. The experimental feed force was

determined on the basis of a preliminary experiment. Preliminary research determined the

average feed force by a mechanical dynamometer (FK 100, Sauter AG; Switzerland)

connected between handle of the saw and a person. The average value in the range of 13

to 28 N was calculated from the values, which were measured during the pulling of the

saw by selected individuals (i.e., groups of 10 women and 10 men between the ages of 19

and 24 years, with body weights between 50 and 95 kg and heights between 161 and 198

cm). On the basis of this preliminary experiment, three levels of feed force were selected

for the present experiment: Fp = 15, 20, and 25 N.



Fig. 5. Experimental stand simulating feed force

Fig. 6. Sequential saw blade movement through the sample with manual feeding on the sliding mitre saw

Fig. 7. Sequential saw blade movement through the sample with feeding on the sliding mitre saw by means of the experimental stand

Fig. 8. Cutting orientation of samples: (a) flatwise cross-cutting at φ2 = 90°; (b) flatwise edge-mitre cross-cutting; and (c) flatwise mitre cross-cutting at φ2 = 45°



During the experiment, the 10-mm-thick test pieces were cut from the conditioned

lumber by a saw blade. During the cutting, three basic models of transversal cutting on

the sliding miter saw were applied: flatwise cross-cutting at φ2 = 90° (M1) (Fig. 8a),

flatwise edge-mitre cross-cutting at φ2 = 45° (M2) (Fig. 8b), and flatwise mitre cross-

cutting at φ2 = 45° (M3) (Fig. 8c). The experiment was carried out at a constant cutting

speed vc = 62 m/s.

Measurements and Evaluation The sample surface roughness was measured using a LPM-4 laser profilometer,

(KVANT s. r. o., Slovakia) (Fig. 9). The profilometer is based on the triangulation

principle of laser profilometry. The image of the laser line was sensed by a digital camera

at an angle. Subsequently, the object profile in cross-section was evaluated from the

captured image. The obtained data were mathematically filtered, and the individual

indices of the primary profile, corrugation profile, and roughness profile were

determined.

The roughness measurements were realized according to ISO 4287 (1997). A

measurement was carried out in three tracks equidistant in the sample width (5, 25, and

45 mm from the sample margin), with a track length of 60 mm and the track oriented in

the sample feed direction for the sawing process (Fig. 10).

Fig. 9. Laser profilometer that measures sample surface roughness. (1) bearing structure allowing the manual preset of the working distance and the fixing of both profilometer head and sliding tables system; (2) profilometer head; (3) system of slides for axes X and Z; and (4) control unit of the work tables sliding system.

Fig. 10. The measuring paths on the test sample. (1) sample; (2) measuring paths; and (3) track teeth of the saw blade.



For each combination (type of saw blade × feed force × cutting model), 20 cuts

per wood species were made so that each final average value was calculated from 60

measured values. The surface roughness was evaluated by the arithmetic mean of the

profile roughness, Ra.

The influence of various factors on the surface roughness was statistically

evaluated using ANOVA (Fisher’s F-test) analysis, in STATISTICA 12 software

(Statsoft Inc.; USA).

The moisture content of samples was determined and verified before and after

testing. These calculations were carried out according to ISO 3130 (1975) and Eq. 1,

1000

0

m

mmw w (1)

where w is the moisture content of the samples (%); mw is the mass (weight) of the test

sample at moisture content w (kg); and m0 is the mass (weight) of the oven-dry test

sample (kg).

Drying to oven-dry state was also carried out according to ISO 3130 (1975), using

the following procedure: wood samples were placed in the drying oven at a temperature

of 103 ± 2 ºC until a constant mass was reached. Constant mass is considered to be

reached if the loss between two successive measurements carried out at an interval of 6 h

is equal to or less than 0.5% of the mass of the test sample. After cooling the test samples

to approximately room temperature in a desiccator, the samples were weighed rapidly

enough to avoid an increase in moisture content of more than 0.1%. The accuracy of

weighing was at least 0.5% of the mass of the test sample.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

From the multi-factor variance analysis in Table 2, all examined factors as well as

their interactions are statistically significant. Based on the F-test, it can be concluded that

the created surface roughness was most of all influenced by the cutting model, followed

by the wood species, saw blade type, and least by the feed force. The obtained data

statistical evaluation shows that the influence of the cutting model has three times the

weight of the remaining examined factors.

Table 2. Influence of Individual Factors on Roughness

Monitored factor Sum of Squares

Degree of Freedom

Variance Fisher's F - Test

Significance Level P

Intercept 52,906 1 52,906 65,566 0.0001

Wood species 842 2 421 521 0.0001

Type of saw blade 1,133 3 377 468 0.0001

Feed force 636 2 318 394 0.0001

Cutting model (M) 2,244 2 1,122 1,390 0.0001

Wood species × Type of saw blade × Feed force × Cutting model

1,496 24 62 77 0.0001

Error 522 648 0.8



As shown in Fig. 11, the surface with the highest quality was made in the case of

the M1 model (flatwise cross-cutting at φ2 = 90°), with a surface average roughness of

6.4 μm. For the M2 model, the roughness increased by 27% to an average value of 8.1

µm. This phenomenon can be explained by the different cutting angles of the cell

elements. While the cell elements in the M1 model are cut at 90°, this angle is 45° in the

M2 model. This causes greater stripping of the wood structure.

The created surface with the worst quality was obtained with the M3 model

(flatwise mitre cross-cutting at φ2 = 45°). Here, the surface roughness increases by 65%,

to 10.6 µm. Based on conventional assumptions, the surface roughness should increase in

the order of M1, M3, and M2. This did not happen, because when comparing M1 and

M3, the expected increase is similar to the previous model due to change of the cell

elements cutting angle from 90° to 45°. While comparing M3 and M2, the expected

increase caused by the cut relative height increase was from 50 to 75 mm. At a constant

cutting speed this situation causes enlargement of feed per tooth, as is demonstrated by

Figure 1, and thus the increase of roughness at created surface.

Fig. 11. Impact of cutting model on surface roughness. Data presented as the average ± standard deviation

To explain this phenomenon, it is necessary to emphasize that at constant feed

speed, the actual feed per tooth depends on the actual cutting resistance, cutting force,

feed force as well as the number of teeth. Thus, the cut height increase acted exactly the

opposite way for the M2 model, and the feed force was distributed on various cutting

wedges, thereby causing the feed per tooth to decrease. Another reason for a more

substantial increase in the surface roughness for the M3 cutting model is the elongation of

earlywood and latewood sections, since the different densities of earlywood and latewood

causes different cutting resistance in their respective sections and thereby affects the feed

per tooth; this is demonstrated by the width of the intervals, as shown in Fig. 11, since the

cut length increases from 150 to 210 mm.

As shown in Fig. 12, the surface roughness increases in the following order:

beech – oak – spruce. In numerical terms, the surface roughness is 6.9 µm for beech, 8.7

µm for oak (26% greater than beech), and 9.5 µm for spruce (37% greater than beech).

The main difference between beech and oak is interesting, because these are wood



species with approximately the same density and cutting force per unit area. However,

this difference has a quite simple explanation. As previously mentioned, the created

surface quality depends directly on feed per tooth and, simultaneously, the actual feed per

tooth depends on actual cutting resistance of the cut material, cutting force, and number

of teeth. Beech, as the densest wood species, and, as far as the macroscopic structure is

concerned, the wood species with the most regular configuration of microscopic

elements, such as libriform fibers, exhibits the best surface roughness.

Despite the similar density value of oak, the surface quality (roughness) was

impaired significantly because of the more irregular distribution of microscopic elements

and greater difference between earlywood and latewood. As expected, spruce exhibits the

worst roughness because it has the lowest density and most irregular distribution of

microscopic elements.

Fig. 12. Impact of wood species on surface roughness. Data presented as the average ± standard deviation

Similar to constant feed speed, a surface roughness decrease occurred with feed

force and with increasing number of saw blade teeth (Fig. 13). This is because of the

increase of teeth number in the cut and therefore the distribution of cutting force into

more cutting wedges. This causes chip thickness reduction and a decrease in the surface

roughness. It is possible to conclude that the created surface roughness depends almost

proportionally on the teeth number, being ruled by the following equations,

0.88411.8810.0885 2 =R+z=Ra (2)

116.8070.35340.0031 22 =R+zz=Ra (3)

where Ra is the arithmetic mean of profile roughness (µm) and z is the number of teeth on

the saw blade.

For constant feed speed, the use of a chip limiter would not make sense because

the chip nominal thickness is affected by the feed speed value and teeth number. At

constant feed force, the use of a chip limiter results in the stabilization of the chip

nominal thickness and also created surface roughness.



Fig. 13. Impact of saw blade type on surface roughness. Data presented as the average ± standard deviation

The feed force impact on the created surface roughness is shown in Fig. 14.

Generally, a feed force increase also increases the created surface roughness. If one

regards the feed force as a separate factor, its impact on the surface roughness can be

described by the following equations,

0.8924.12130.2122 2 =R+F=R Pa (4)

119,9460,8130.0256 22=R+FF=R PPa (5)

where Ra is the arithmetic mean of profile roughness parameter (µm) and Fp is the feed

force (N). However, for an objective assessment of the feed force impact, this shall be

considered in an interaction with the already evaluated factors because these limit the

impact on the proper sawing process. Therefore, the authentic multi-factor analyses are

more objective (Figs. 15, 16, and 17).

Fig. 14. Impact of feed force on surface roughness. Data presented as the average ± standard deviation



These figures confirm the already formulated functions, i.e., that the created

surface roughness is directly dependent on the actual cutting resistance (which is affected

by the cutting model and wood species within the experiment), cutting force (affected by

saw blade type), and feed force (affected by saw blade type and the proper feed force

value as set up).

A typical feature of this process is precisely the attempt to simulate the saw blade

manual feed into the cut and ensuring constant feed force, in contrast to studies dealing

with transversal sawing which take into account constant feed speed. It is this fact that

makes it impossible to compare the results with each other. If the feed per tooth is the

comparison criterion, similar tendencies with experiments with constant feed speed can

be observed.

Fig. 15. Impact of saw blade type, cutting model, and feed force on surface roughness of beech. Data presented as the average ± standard deviation

Fig. 16. Impact of saw blade type, cutting model, and feed force on surface roughness of oak. Data presented as the average ± standard deviation



Table 3 shows the roughness average values for the created surface, including the

95% confidence intervals for all examined factors and wood species.

Table 3. Average Values of Roughness for Individual Combinations of Factors

Type of saw blade

Feed force (N)

Cutting model

Roughness Ra (μm)

Beech Oak Spruce

Mean -95%* +95%* Mean -95% +95% Mean -95% +95%

24 teeth + CL 15 M1 4.6 3.8 5.5 5.1 4.3 5.9 5.8 5.0 6.6

24 teeth + CL 15 M2 6.0 5.1 6.9 7.6 6.7 8.4 4.6 3.7 5.4

24 teeth + CL 15 M3 5.6 4.7 6.5 11.4 10.6 12.2 14.9 14.0 15.8

24 teeth + CL 20 M1 6.9 6.1 7.8 4.9 4.1 5.7 5.0 4.1 5.9

24 teeth + CL 20 M2 6.0 5.3 6.8 7.7 6.9 8.5 7.9 7.0 8.8

24 teeth + CL 20 M3 12.5 11.6 13.3 15.5 14.6 16.3 9.1 8.3 9.9

24 teeth + CL 25 M1 7.7 6.9 8.6 10.6 9.7 11.4 7.0 6.2 7.8

24 teeth + CL 25 M2 11.6 10.8 12.4 13.1 12.3 14.0 7.3 6.5 8.1

24 teeth + CL 25 M3 10.1 9.3 10.9 11.2 10.4 12.1 17.6 16.8 18.4

24 teeth 15 M1 5.8 5.0 6.6 9.4 8.5 10.3 8.8 8.0 9.6

24 teeth 15 M2 9.3 8.5 10.2 8.4 7.6 9.2 8.2 7.4 9.0

24 teeth 15 M3 14.3 13.4 15.2 9.7 8.8 10.5 7.2 6.4 8.0

24 teeth 20 M1 5.0 4.1 5.9 11.6 10.8 12.4 9.5 8.7 10.3

24 teeth 20 M2 6.8 5.9 7.7 9.3 8.5 10.1 8.7 7.8 9,6

24 teeth 20 M3 5.0 4.2 5.7 9.2 8.4 10.0 22.8 21.9 23.6

24 teeth 25 M1 6.4 5.6 7.2 6.9 6.1 7.7 7.7 6.9 8.6

24 teeth 25 M2 12.0 11.1 12.8 8.8 8.0 9.6 20.3 19.5 21.0

24 teeth 25 M3 8.8 8.0 9.6 11.8 10.9 12.6 21.9 21.0 22.8

40 teeth 15 M1 5.5 4.7 6.3 6.5 5.6 7.4 5.7 4.8 6.6

40 teeth 15 M2 5.0 4.2 5.8 9.5 8.7 10.3 7.0 6.2 7.8

40 teeth 15 M3 6.8 6.0 7.6 6.1 5.3 6.8 8.9 8.0 9,7

40 teeth 20 M1 5.7 4.9 6.5 4.5 3.8 5.3 5.5 4.7 6.3

40 teeth 20 M2 4.8 3.9 5.6 6.6 5.7 7.5 8.1 7.3 8.9

40 teeth 20 M3 6.8 5.9 7.6 8.6 7.8 9.4 12.7 11.9 13.5

40 teeth 25 M1 7.0 6.2 7.8 6.0 5.2 6.8 9.5 8.6 10.3

40 teeth 25 M2 7.3 6.6 8.1 9.9 9.0 10.7 8.9 8.1 9.8

40 teeth 25 M3 7.8 6.9 8.6 13.8 13.0 14.6 13.0 12.1 13.9

60 teeth 15 M1 5.4 4.5 6.3 5.1 4.3 5.9 5.3 4.5 6.2

60 teeth 15 M2 5.5 4.7 6.2 10.5 9.7 11.4 6.9 6.0 7.8

60 teeth 15 M3 4.7 3.9 5.5 10.0 9.2 10.8 9.8 9.0 10.5

60 teeth 20 M1 5.2 4.3 6.0 4.4 3.5 5.2 4.9 4.1 5,7

60 teeth 20 M2 5.6 4.8 6.4 5.4 4.5 6.3 7.0 6.2 7.8

60 teeth 20 M3 5.7 4.8 6.5 9.8 8,9 10.7 11.2 10.4 12.0

60 teeth 25 M1 3.4 2,6 4.2 6.3 5,4 7.2 5.7 4.9 6.5

60 teeth 25 M2 6.3 5.5 7.2 6.4 5.6 7.1 7.3 6.5 8.1

60 teeth 25 M3 7.0 6.1 7.9 12.0 11.2 12.8 8.7 7.9 9.6

*Note: ±95% confidence interval of variance

Droba and Svoreň (2012) and Mikleš et al. (2010) argue that with the correct

choice of process parameters, transverse sawing can achieve quality of the resulting

surface at the level of Ra ≤ 10 mm, which corresponds to plane milling. Siklienka and

Janda (2013), Novák et al. (2011), and Sandak and Negri (2005) found that when

creating smoother surfaces, this smoothness is affected by the anatomical structure of the

material. The present conclusions fully correspond with Krílek et al. (2014) and Droba



and Svoreň (2012), who found that the design of the saw blade directly affects the power

relations in the cutting process, which is subsequently reflected in the quality of the

generated surface.

Fig. 17. Impact of saw blade type, cutting model, and feed force on surface roughness of spruce. Data presented as the average ± standard deviation

CONCLUSIONS

1. Surface roughness similar to that of plane milling can also be achieved by a

transversal sawing. The roughness values ranged from 4 to 23 µm, depending on the

actual cutting model, wood species, saw blade type, and feed force.

2. The used cutting model influences the created surface roughness increase in the

following order: flatwise cross-cutting at φ2 = 90° (M1), flatwise edge-mitre cross-

cutting at φ2 = 45° (M2), and flatwise mitre cross-cutting at φ2 = 45°.

3. The feed force acts by means of cutting wedges (teeth) on the work piece. An almost

proportional decrease of the surface roughness was found with increasing teeth

number.

4. Both sawn wood homogeneity and density influence the created surface roughness.

The denser and more homogeneous the wood, the smaller the created surface

roughness.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors are grateful for the support of the Cultural and Educational Grant

Agency of the Ministry of Education, Science, Research, and Sport of the Slovak

Republic, (No. 018TU Z-4/2013), “Cutting and Machining of Wood.”



REFERENCES CITED

Barcík, Š., and Gašparík, M. (2014). “Effect of tool and milling parameters on the size

distribution of splinters of planed native and thermally modified beech wood,”

BioResources 9(1), 1346-1360. DOI: 10.15376/biores.9.1.1346-1360

Budakçi, M., İlçe, A. C., Korkut, D. S., and Gürleyen, T. (2011). “Evaluating the surface

roughness of heat-treated wood cut with different circular saws,” BioResources 6(4),

4247-4258. DOI: 10.15376/biores.6.4.4247-4258

Droba, A., and Svoreň, J. (2012). “Vplyv konštrukčného vyhotovenia pílových kotúčov

pre zníženie hluku a výslednú kvalitu obrobeného povrchu,” Acta Facultatis

Technicae XVII(1), 15-23 (in Slovak with English abstract).

Efe, H., Gürleyen, L., and Budakçi, M. (2007). “Effect of the cutting direction and

number of knives on surface smoothness and bonding strength for Acacia,” Journal

of Forestry Faculty, Kastamonu University 7(1), 13-23.

Fekiač, J., Zemiar, J., Gaff, M., Gáborík, J., Gašparík, M., and Marušák, R. (2015). “3D-

moldability of veneers plasticized with water and ammonia,” BioResources 10(1),

866-876. DOI: 10.15376/biores.10.1.866-876

Gaff, M. (2014). “Three-dimensional pneumatic molding of veneers,” BioResources 9(3),

5676-5687. DOI: 10.15376/biores.9.3.5676-5687

Gaff, M., and Matlák, J. (2014). “Modification of veneers by lamination and steaming for

the purpose of increasing 3D moldability,” BioResources 9(4), 7141-7151.

DOI: 10.15376/biores.9.4.7141-7151

ISO 3130. (1975). “Wood – Determination of moisture content for physical and

mechanical tests,” International Organization for Standardization, Geneva,

Switzerland.

ISO 4287. (1997). “Geometrical product specifications (GPS) - Surface texture: Profile

method - Terms, definitions and surface texture parameters,” International

Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland.

Kilic, M., Hiziroglu, S., and Burdurlu, E. (2006). “Effect of machining on surface

roughness of wood,”Building and Environment 41(8), 1074-1078.

DOI: 10.1016/j.buildenv.2005.05.008

Krílek, J., Kováč. J., and Kučera, M. (2014). “Wood crosscutting process analysis for

circular saws,” BioResources 9(1), 1417-1429. DOI: 10.15376/biores.9.1.1417-1429

Kvietková, M., Gaff, M., Gašparík, M., Kminiak, R., and Kriš, A. (2015). “Effect of

number of saw blade teeth on noise level and lifetime of blade edges during cutting of

wood,” BioResources 10(1), 1657-1666. DOI: 10.15376/biores.10.1.1657-1666

Malkoçoğlu, A. (2007).“Machining properties and surface roughness of various wood

species planed in different conditions,”Building and Environment 42(7), 2562-2567.

DOI: 10.1016/j.buildenv.2006.08.028

Mikleš, M., Kováč, J., and Krílek, J. (2010). “Výskum rezných podmienok priečneho

pílenia dreva, [Research of cutting conditions of wood cross-cutting],” Scientific

study, Technical University in Zvolen, Slovakia, (in Slovak).

Novák, V., Rousek, M., and Kopecký, Z. (2011). “Assessment of wood surface quality

obtained during high speed milling by use of non-contact method,” Drvna Industrija

62(2), 103-115. DOI: 10.5552/drind.2011.1027

Örs, Y., and Baykan, I. (1999). “The effects of planning and sanding on surface

roughness for solid wood material,” Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry

23(3), 577-582.



Örs, Y., Kalaycioğlu, H., and Çolakoğlu, G. (1991). “The effect of saw tooth geometry

on timber surface quality,” Doğa, Tr. J.of Agriculture and Forestry15, 777-784.

Sadoh, T., and Nakato, K. (1987). “Surface properties of wood in physical and sensory

aspects,” Wood Science and Technology 21(2), 111-120. DOI: 10.1007/BF00376191

Sandak, J., and Negri, M. (2005). “Wood surface roughness - What is it?” Proceedings of

the 17th International Wood Machining Seminar (IWMS 17), Volume 1, Rosenheim,

Germany, pp. 242-250.

Siklienka, M., and Janda, P. (2013). “Effect of method of clamping milling head to the

quality of the surface during milling on the four-sided milling machine,” Annals of

Warsaw University of Life Sciences. Forestry and Wood Technology 81(1), 130-136.

Siklienka, M., and Kminiak, R. (2013). “Basics of Woodworking,” 1st Ed., Technical

University in Zvolen.

Yildiz, S. (2002).“Physical, mechanical, technological and chemical properties of beech

and spruce wood treated by heating,” Ph.D. Thesis, Karadeniz Technical University,

Trabzon.

Article submitted: December 22, 2014; Peer review completed: March 17, 2015; Revised

version received: March 20, 2015; Accepted: March 21, 2015; Published: March 25,

2015.

DOI: 10.15376/biores.10.2.2873-2887

PEER-REVIEWED ARTICLE bioresources ARTICLE bioresources.com Kminiak & Gaff (2015). “Wood...

Documents

Transcript of PEER-REVIEWED ARTICLE bioresources ARTICLE bioresources.com Kminiak & Gaff (2015). “Wood...